Pages

Sunday, 11 March 2007

'The Great Global Warming Swindle' - NOW ONLINE

Screening last Thursday night in the UK, Martin Durkin's doco 'The Great Global Warming Swindle' has made an undeniable impact. So let me say right off the bat that you can now see it on the internet, and there's a link either at the foot of this post, or by clicking on the picture at left.

This is not a review, it is a flat-out endorsement: YOU MUST SEE THIS FILM!

It is the ESSENTIAL antidote to Al Bore's doomfest, and the single best short answer to all those seeking to shackle productivity in the name of 'carbon neutrality.' I suggest you do whatever you can to make sure that you see it, and that as many warmists as you know see it with you.

Undeniably interesting is Durkin's background, alluded to in the Samizdata review, and profiled more fully by NBR's Nevil Gibson:

I hadn’t previously heard of him but Durkin is associated with the former UK-based Revolutionary Communist Party, a group that has moved from neo-Marxism to libertarianism. Its views can be found in the works of Frank Furedi (‘Politics of Fear’) and at spiked.com.

It believes poverty is solved by free trade and economic growth; that Marx was right about invincibility of capitalism and its ability to deliver prosperity (it is then a matter of spreading it around); and that bringing (electric) power to the people is a virtue.

While radical, the group’s pro-technology and anti-environmental stance, plus opposition to all forms of regulation and censorship, make it appealing to right wingers as well.

The enemy is new age socialism that favours heavy regulation and inhibits progress in favour of turning the clock back from globalisation and capitalism to a world where nature rules and (preferably) man has disappeared.

Durkin achieved notoriety for an earlier documentary, ‘Against Nature’ (1997), in which he exposed how the DDT ban now causes millions of deaths from malaria and why the campaigns against hydro-electric dams prevent the supply of safe water and sanitation to millions of others.

Durkin isn’t afraid to take his camera into the Third World hovels of Africa and the Indian subcontinent ... to show the wretched state of their inhabitants, who are denied the benefits of science and industry in the name of ‘sustainable development.’

Though debunking the bogus “science” behind the environmentalist movement is important, an editorial in today’s NY Times illustrates that, as with so many social/political issues, it is at the moral level that the battle truly must be fought. And in this sense, Objectivism is the only system that can offer a true (i.e. scientific) defense of man and his place on earth.

From the editorial:

Whether or not you agree with them about, say, homosexuality and abortion — and we emphatically do not — it is antiquated to limit the definition of morality to the way humans behave among humans.

Those days have been over ever since it became apparent that humans — busy thinking only about their own lives — had the power to destroy huge numbers of species, whole landscapes of habitat and, in fact, the balance of life on earth. The greatest moral issue of our time is our responsibility to the planet and to all its inhabitants.

Looks like there's one thing that Objectivists and Al Gore do agree on: that this is a moral issue. The difference is that Objectivists recognise that morality does not require sacrifice, and certainly not any sort of sacrifice to the high priests of a non-existent apocalypse.

UPDATE 2: The folks at WAG TV, the producers of this documentary, start producing DVDs on a small scale on Monday. Price: US$ 19.99 / £9.99. They also report they are seeking a mainstream US broadcast outlet.

If you want it screened on NZ TV, the best thing to do is write, phone, email or visit the two main broadcasters and insist (politely) that they do. TVNZ contact page is here; TV3's is here.

This is a film you have to get hold of and show all your warmist friends who have been seduced by Al Bore. It's a much better film than Bore's, and this one actually makes sense -- it is the single best one-hour-and-a-bit anti-warmist argument you can offer. It is that good!

I have said here in many occasions and everywhere in blogosphere that when you start with a wrong formulations and assumptions of a particular mathematical model, then of course you would end up with the wrong conclusions. Not only that, the model might work well in a specific narrow domain, but fail to generalize in the wider domain. This is exactly what Dr. Roy Spencer of NASA, mentioned in the The Great Global Warming Swindle video.